×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

P.E. licensure in New Jersey

P.E. licensure in New Jersey

P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Have any of you been granted P.E. licensure in New Jersey by way of taking the 16-hour Structural (S.E.) exam?

I took and passed the 16-hour S.E. exam in Pennsylvania as my first and only exam to receive P.E. licensure in PA, and then became licensed as a P.E. in MD, VA, WV, NY, DE, and DC via comity with no problems with any of the state boards, even though none of these states have any special recognition for S.E. licensure - all only give a regular P.E. but none had any issues with the 16-hour exam.

I finally got around to applying for my P.E. in New Jersey this year and received a letter in response that basically recognizes what exam I took and then states that "there was no indication that you passed the Principles and Practices portion of the NCEES examination, which was required by the NJ Board at the time of your initial licensure. Please be advised that the Board does not recognize the Structural I and Structural II examinations as substitutes for the Principles and Practices (Part P) portion of the NCEES examination. At this time, and until you can demonstrate that you have taken and passed the Principals & Practice examination, your application cannot be considered for approval."

Prior to responding to the NJ Board, I was hoping to see if there is anyone out there who has come across this with New Jersey before and if anyone has advice on how to proceed?

Anyone familiar with the 16-hour S.E. exam would logically conclude that this exam successfully demonstrates competency to practice engineering, but due to its special designation (not technically called a P.E. exam), it looks like NJ Board is either too lazy to formally review and approve it, or else is just not familiar with the exam to understand what it is. I tend to want to give them the benefit of the doubt and think the latter case may be true since the letter I received came from their Executive Director and he incorrectly referred to the exams as the Structural I and Structural II, which are obsolete not what I had indicated that I took.

Obviously my goal here is to receive P.E. licensure in New Jersey without having to go and take a regular P.E. exam, so anyone with some advice or feedback on how that may or may not be possible would be much appreciated.

Thanks,

Jon

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Hey Jon,

I see no one has responded yet. I'm registered in 23 states and though I'm not registered in NJ I've seen issues like this in other states. I'm willing to bet this is just a misunderstanding and you do meet the requirements for licensure in NJ. Ask them to clarify what they need for testing and I'm sure they will eventually understand that you meet all the criteria.

Dwayne

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Yeah, uh, da 16 hour exam ain't good enough...gotta take da 8 hour one.

Gotta love it.bangheadcheers

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

I also took the SE exam in lieu of the PE exam for licensure in the state of Maine. I'm in the process of applying for a NH and MA stamp right now and expect that to go through.

The only requirement Maine had was that I pass a NCEES engineering licensure exam with 8 hours or more of test time. Thus, the 16 hour exam (as long as I passed both parts) was considered acceptable. However, on my record they simply listed that I passed PE Structural (but then didn't credit me in the news letter as passing the PE exam and getting my Maine PE upsidedown) so I know there is definitely a disconnect as to what they seem to think I took for an exam.

I hope you get this resolved. My whole intent with the SE exam was, as I plan to do 99% structural engineering in my career, I don't need a PE exam nor does it represent my competence. Thus, I figured I could avoid taking both the PE and SE exam and go straight to the SE. I really hope I don't have to backtrack and take the PE now just for a few odd states.

In my mind, assuming you're doing mostly structural engineering, the SE is a much tougher and 2 times longer exam. It should count in lieu for the PE unless your typical field is not structural engineering.

Maine Professional and Structural Engineer
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

>>>It should count in lieu for the PE unless your typical field is not structural engineering.<<<

Of course it does; that's it's whole purpose for existing. The 8-hour structural exam is no longer offered. It's a shame news apparently doesn't travel from Clemson, SC to Trenton, NJ.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
That head bashing against the brick wall emoticon sums it up perfectly. I didn't even bother explaining the 8 month process I went through with New Jersey just to get them to review my application. But suffice it to say, they're the flag bearer of governmental incompetence.

I haven't yet responded directly to the NJ Board, as I was hoping to find someone with previous experience with New Jersey and acceptance of the SE exam to be as informed as possible in my response. NCEES was of no help. In fact, NCEES strengthened NJ's case against me by explicitly stating that the 16-hour SE exam is definitely NOT a unique form of the PE exam. It is separate and unique and not to be mistaken as a PE exam. I have an email out to NCSEA to see if they can provide any background information but I doubt they will be much help either. I just want to be armed with as many facts as possible before responding to make as solid of a case as possible to have them grant me licensure.

The trouble I've found some of these small government offices is that people aren't willing to use common sense. They won't even try to use their brain to logically conclude that the 16-hour exam meets the intent of their law, they will only look at the language in their law that states "must pass Principles and Practice exam" and see that this exam is not titled that, and then case closed, no room for debate.

I really hope cooler heads will prevail but if I had to bet my life on it, I'd guess that this is a losing battle.

Jon

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Keep in mind, NJ exists to make Pennsylvania look intelligent. Try calling the NJ chapter of NSPE they should be able to provide some guidance. For what it's worth, I got my NJ license by reciprocity - long before NCEES & 16-hour structural exams - but it took time. They rejected my application the first time for some stupid reason I can't remember.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

This might be like the case of someone who was constantly billed for $0.00 and kept getting increasingly-threatening letters for not paying. After dealing with the customer service department to no avail he finally solved the problem by sending in a check for $0.00. What I'm getting at is that if you really need that license, can't make headway otherwise and your knowledge of civil engineering topics is broad enough (mine isn't) perhaps you could take the 8-hour exam in civil and make an end run around the bureaucrats.

By the time you do all that, though, the issue may have resolved itself. After all, surely the NJ structural engineering community wants their new hires to be licensable at some point.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Good analogy Archie, and my boss said something to the same effect. My company absolutely needs me to get licensed in NJ, so somehow or another I need to get it figured out. It's already causing our business problems by how long it has taken.

By retaking the P.E. I would be looking at taking the April exam and June to be licensed. And the trouble is that I'm not sure I would even pass it. I was an Architectural Engineering major in college with a focus on building structures. My knowledge of all of the other aspects of Civil Engineering is literally zero, so 40% of the Civil Structural exam would be new material for me that I would then never use again in my life. My other option would be to take the relatively new Architectural Engineering exam, but I don't remember much of anything about the mechanical or electrical stuff I learned in school and the scope of that exam is of course beyond the introductory classes I had on those topics anyway. That's why I thought my best chance to pass any exam was the 16-hour structural exam since that is my specialty, and studying for it wouldn't be solely for the purpose of passing a test. So perhaps the $0.00 check isn't quite the perfect analogy, since taking a new test would take significant study time when I have many better things to do than appeasing idiots the fine folks in government offices who are rejecting my application based on the title of a test not matching what an old law states without looking at the intent of the law in light of recent developments in the engineering community.

Again, banghead Insanely frustrating paradox.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Can you apply for a temporary license until you get your PE license/exam sorted out?

Maine Professional and Structural Engineer
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
No, New Jersey doesn't do temporary licenses. It's the real deal or nothing at all with them.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

The fact that they still require embossed seals on drawings should be a flag that they are behind everyone else. I had a couple state government jobs that required calculations and we basically sent the same calculations 4 times before they were 'accepted' with no changes whatsoever. I guess it's all part of the bureaucratic mess.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Could the NJ "problem" be that the SE exam is more specialized and does not demonstrate competency in many of the other civil topics that are covered in the PE exam?

www.PeirceEngineering.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

PEinc, so was the old 8-hour structural exam: it was nothing but structural as well.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
All forms of the 8-hour P.E. exams are specialized to a specific field to a very large degree, and yet all result the exact same P.E. license being granted so I can't think it's that NJ has it out for structural engineers that don't know anything about storm water systems.

I seriously doubt they are even thinking about it critically like that or have any real logical basis for their rejection, which is wherein the real problem lies and why I think I have little to no chance of winning this battle. If they were thinking about it to the level of rationalizing a reason for not accepting the 16-hour SE, they would have no reason to reject it.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

While I certainly sympathize with you and agree that what you are being told doesn't make a lot of sense; keep in mind that IF (and I don't know one way or the other) the NJ law says you have to pass the P&P examine the person reviewing the application may have no choice. Remember, they have to follow the law. If the law is written poorly, don't blame the person charged with enforcing the law, blame the people who wrote the law.

That said, good luck. I'm afraid you are going to need it.

Mike Lambert

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
That is a good point, Mike, thanks for the reminder. It will help me keep composure in my follow up to the Board.

On the other hand though, the same language about either the "P.E. exam" or "Principles and Practice exam" is written virtually the same in all 7 of the other jurisdictions that I am licensed in, without special mention of the S.E. exam. That makes sense since the 16-hour S.E. wasn't around the last time most of these rules were reviewed and enacted, but the other states either didn't review my application very closely and approved it just because I was licensed elsewhere, or else used common sense to understand the intent of the law and not the nitpick the title of the exam. And since the state licensing boards are the ones who basically write the laws to put in front of legislature to pass, it seems silly that the board can't interpret the real intent of their own rules that are intended to ensure competency of people practicing engineering.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

GeoPaveTraffic,

Yes, that's no-doubt the case; the clerk at the licensing board doesn't make the rules and is not entitled to ignore them. The state legislature makes the rules...either by adopting the licensing board's recommendations or deferring to them. The licensing board exists to determine the requirements for licensure and grant licenses to applicants who meet said requirements. That's not tangential to their job; that is their job. And they have clearly not done their job because they've created a Catch-22 situation wherein newly-eligible structural engineers cannot be licensed. They are requiring them to take a test that is no longer offered. It's inexcusable.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

To get a license to design tanks, I had to take a test on sizing pumps, etc. It doesn't always make sense.
I can just imagine going down for a driver's license and having to take a test to see if you can whistle. That's about what it amounts to.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Not saying you should, but if you do exhaust all options I would be willing to join you in making as big a stink about this as possible. Being in New England it's not unreasonable I may need a NJ license in the near or far future and I don't want to run into the same problem you're having. This should be changed and I'd love to help make it happen.

Maine Professional and Structural Engineer
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
TehMightyEngineer,

I'll see where I get with exhausting all possibilities to get them to recognize the SE exam, and if they don't I will definitely make an effort to get them to reevaluate their current regulations with a letter at the very least, and possibly try to get one of the local chapters of the various structural engineering associates to write them a letter as well. And I'd figure the more people that scream about it, the better chance of getting heard, so I'll definitely keep you posted about my progress.

I have been considering making a formal response in writing but I think I'm first going to try to get the guy who wrote the letter on the phone to hopefully get a better explanation of where they're coming from before formally responding. I wonder if they're even familiar with the 16-hour SE exam; this could be a case of ignorance, especially considering the Executive Director of the Board is the one who wrote the letter and referred to the old Structural I and Structural II exams. If that is the case, their ignorance would be inexcusable but it at least would be a logical explanation as to why they aren't recognizing that exam, and perhaps we could get the board to at least take a look at it and evaluate its worthiness and issue an addendum of some sort to formally recognize it as an acceptable exam for P.E. licensure.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

I'm on a national committee that promotes SE licensure and has a high ranking member of NCEES included. I'm sure we'd be interested in hearing more about your specific issue. Is there private messaging system with this forum for us to connect?

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
sforesman,
That would be amazing to get some support from a larger organization. I feel like that would be much more effective and taken more seriously than just a single disgruntled engineer being denied licensure.

I don't know of any PM system on this forum, and their rules state not to post emails, phone numbers or other personal information so I don't want to get in trouble from the people who run this great forum. Not sure how else to tell you to get in touch with me. Perhaps if you say what committee you're on, I can find the committee's contact info online and reach out to you that way?

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Jonkirk31,

Ignorance? Yeah, maybe. That’s one of the possibilities. But I’ve had a bit of time to think about it and it dawned on me that there might be something else going on. Professional licensure is a barrier to entry to a profession, one that it’s good to be on this side of. And to that end, certain requirements imposed by various states sure seem to resemble intentional barriers against practice by professionals in neighboring states, or states with large populations of engineers that could poach work from the locals.

With that in mind it is also worth noting that New Jersey has quite a reputation for…(how do I put this politely?)…well, for keeping people out of professions. If you’ve been there you know there are no self-serve gas stations as that would take work away from our friends in the Brotherhood of Fumebreathers, or whatever they call themselves. Governor Chrispy Cream got revenge on people in a certain region by shutting down a commuter bridge into New York thereby preventing them from getting to work. And try practicing a trade there without being in a union: they’d shut down the bridge again to ceremonially throw you off it with cinderblocks tied to your legs. Am I being unfair? No, that state’s protectivist body of work speaks for itself.

So, with that in mine, it is entirely plausible that what they’ve done regarding structural licensure is actually intentional. Cumbersome though it may be it nevertheless accomplishes the goal of keeping newcomers out of their market. If that’s the case (and sure, I’m the one being ridiculous here [rolls eyes]) then, jonkirk31, your only option is to retake the test in another discipline. And is distasteful as that is, having just passed the 16-hour exam, time (and business) is a-wasting. Return to the books, young man.

That’s the bad news. There might be a glimmer of hope, though. New Jersey is not a normal state in that its northern portion is essentially a continuation of New York City. And there’s an entity, (very) arguably the greatest civil engineering organization that’s ever existed, known as the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. With regard to that organization the two states are one. If I were you I would consider contacting them and making them aware that their newly-eligible New York-educated and domiciled structural engineers are not licensable in New Jersey without goosing the system. There’s a slight chance that that might work. More likely, though, (1) you’ll have trouble reaching anyone of influence in that bureaucracy and (2) they’ve probably carved out an exemption for Port Authority engineers.

If that doesn’t work and if Brother Sforesman here can’t crack this nut then in the meantime, to quit forfeiting work in New Jersey you might have to consider partnering with a local engineer there. Which, of course, is the whole point.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Jonkirk,

I'll lead you on a goose chase, then I'm editing the post soon thereafter. Please send an email as soon as you figure it out...

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Archie264,

Never thought of it from that perspective, but you're right that these guys might be dumb as a fox about rejecting the S.E. exam. New Jersey certainly is a unique state from a business and labor perspective, to say the least.

That's some great advice about the Port Authority, I didn't even think about them. We do a lot of business in northern NJ and have some people that we work with who are well connected to the Port Authority, but we don't personally have any good direct connections with them. But thanks for the suggestion, that could be the one agency who the NJ Board of PE's and PLS's might actually listen to if they were to urge the NJ Board to reevaluate their stance on the SE exam. Interestingly, I had no issue getting licensed in New York via comity.

In the meantime, our company has an engineer who is licensed in NJ who can seal work we do there but he is no longer in the engineering department - he has moved on to a business development role. It is rather cumbersome to have him review the work of projects he otherwise would not be involved in with our normal flow of business. So not like it's giving up doing work in NJ, just makes our internal processes very inefficient and far from ideal.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
sforesman, I missed the original post. You can probably find me on google pretty easily though now that I think about it.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

archie264: Obviously, you've live or worked in NJ. Your post pretty much sums things up. However, regarding PANYNJ, if the project is in NY the plans are sealed by NY PE; if the project is in NJ it's sealed by NJ PE. If the project is in both states, two seals. Been there, done that.

Sforesman, jonkirk131: try contacting the Eng-Tips website management. They should be able to put you two in touch. Or type an email address as follows: johndotdoeatcompanydotcom. It's been done here before.

Have you tried calling the NJ chapter of NSPE?

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
sforesman was able to track me down today and his committee is going to discuss this topic at their next meeting, which coincidentally happens to be coming up very soon. I'm quite hopeful and optimistic that their organization will have enough clout to at least get states like New Jersey to reconsider their stance of not accepting the SE exam as an allowable form of examination for regular P.E. licensure. From some searching I did online about the topic, it sounds like New Jersey isn't the only state taking this position so having a national organization address the issue to NCEES and/or collectively to the individual state boards could be very powerful and provide meaningful progress to the recognition of the S.E. exam across the country. Even if NCEES could be convinced to write a position statement that the S.E. exam is typically considered adequate for P.E. licensure in lieu of the Principals and Practice exam, that would be very powerful evidence to present to a state board.

I have not yet tried getting in touch with the NJ chapter of NSPE but plan to do so. NCSEA is also currently looking into the situation. Hopefully a unified coalition of several nationally engineering associations with each crafting a position statement or something similar to the state boards would be compelling enough that even New Jersey would have to reconsider their position.

I think at this point I want to get as much ammo as possible with feedback from these organizations before directly responding to the NJ State Board. Perhaps informing them that several national organizations are planning to contact them in regards to this issue would be overwhelming enough to be an embarrassment to their position to force their hand to reconsider. Doubtful, but I think it would increase my odds of winning the battle.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

I would be very surprised if NSPE, or the New Jersey chapter of NSPE, would weigh in on this matter in your favor. It is my understanding that NSPE has historically taken a negative stance on any attempt to license individual disciplines and, in essence, that is what you are advocating by asking New Jersey to accept the SE exam in lieu of a PE exam. For the record, I completely agree with your position and think it is crazy on the surface for anyone to argue that having passed a 16-hour exam (an NCEES-developed and administered exam, no less) in your specific discipline is somehow less evidence of your competence than if you had passed an 8-hour PE exam. I am a PE and SE myself (but not licensed in New Jersey) so I have not run into this specific issue.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Hokie93,
My hope is that any statement would be written to the extent that the 16-hour SE exam should be deemed an acceptable alternative to the other 8-hour PE exams (which are also discipline-specific) for PE licensure in states that do not have discipline-specific licenses. It would have to be written such that it avoids any confusion about asking for specialized structural licensure, as many states have already considered SE licenses and decided against it. So I'm sure those states that have already looked into SE licensure would meet anything that says "SE" on it with a skeptical eye and the document would have to be worded carefully to get favorable results for the simple goal of having the 16-hour test be deemed worthy for a regular PE.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Jonkirk:
My point is simply that I think you will find a much friendlier ally in an organization such as NCSEA and the New Jersey chapter of NCSEA. I would be surprised if NSPE would support you. Simply put, NSPE believes that you should only be permitted to take an 8-hour PE exam for licensure purposes. I am not kicking NSPE at all; they do lots of great things and I have been an active member for over 20 years. Frankly, I am very surprised that NCEES isn't offering more support.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Thanks, Hokie93, that's good to know their stance. I see what you're saying now. That type of insight is exactly what I was hoping to learn on here.

That makes me wonder if any of the NJ Board members are connected with NPSE and share the same stance. I had been thinking (or at least hoping) that their board is just ignorant to the 16-hour S.E. exam just due to the way their letter called it the Structural I and Structural II exam, but perhaps that was just a silly mistake and they are fully aware of the 16-hour exam and have already made up their mind that it is not going to be accepted. That could be a losing battle no matter what any of the national engineering organizations say. I can only hope that is not the case, as it would be an unfortunate situation to be up against.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

So, as I annoyingly predicted above, there is a small but distinct potential that we'll be shipping a precast utility building to New Jersey and will likely require a stamped drawing. I'll likely need to get a NJ stamp but will have the exact same trouble as the OP.

Did this ever get resolved or go anywhere?

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
TehMightyEngineer,

Yeah, unfortunately the end result is not good for you or myself. Sforesman and I were able to get in touch and he is on a committee that features members of NCEES and some other national councils that are very up to date on the entire topic of SE licensure and states that do and do not require it or even recognize the SE exam.

Long story short, New Jersey's law (as well as some other states apparently) is specific about requiring an 8-hour Principals and Practice of Engineering Exam, and that technically excludes the 16-hour S.E. The State Board has decided to apply the language of the law exactly as it is written and has no current plans to revise the law or make exceptions for the 16-hour S.E.

Hopefully this will change in the future with suggestions and pressures from groups like what sforesman is involved with, but looks like that isn't happening any time soon.

I'm currently planning to take a P.E. exam in the spring. Not sure which one yet since every option will involve me learning a lot of stuff for the first time, but either the Civil-Structural or the Architectural Engineering exam. The shame of all of that is that even if I do pass it, what has that proven? That I'm good at studying to take a test? Certainly not that I have an expert understanding of applying engineering principles and judgement on a topic that I have never practiced and never will. This is contradictory to the entire principle of having an exam to demonstrate competence. Very frustrating and not really anything we can do about it at this point other than hit the books.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Well, I'll write the NJ PE board just to add my voice to yours to try to get this changed but that's definitely some unfortunate news.

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Looks like you or someone similar made the NJ engineering board's meeting minutes back in 2012:

[link https://www.google.com/url?
sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CEMQFjAEahUKEwiJjsvJiZjJAhUDc
D4KHXJcC_g&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.njconsumeraffairs.gov%2Fpels%2Fminutes%
2Fpelsmin_122012.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFLihmYc6xnNfs2SHcI2vR4Wdy8UQ&sig2=XzzEPt
On08opyqPv6xQGUQ&cad=rja]https://www.google.com/url?
sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CEMQFjAEahUKEwiJjsvJiZjJAhUDc
D4KHXJcC_g&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.njconsumeraffairs.gov%2Fpels%2Fminutes%
2Fpelsmin_122012.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFLihmYc6xnNfs2SHcI2vR4Wdy8UQ&sig2=XzzEPt
On08opyqPv6xQGUQ&cad=rja[/link]

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Yeah it really is unfortunate since it's counterproductive to what the Board's real goal should be - to allow good, competent, and qualified engineers to practice and to keep the bad ones out.

I struggle to come up with the right word for it. Is there a word that combines "unfortunate" with "idiotic", "unjust", and "frustrating"? Or is that just "governmental agency"?

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Here's the letter I sent to the NJ board:

Quote (Letter)

Mr. Karl Reidel,

It's come to my attention that New Jersey does not accept licensure by comity for engineers who have been licensed by taking the 16-hour Structural Engineering (SE) exam offered by NCEES. I want to officially protest this and request this be changed.

While the 8-hour NCEES PE exam is certainly sufficient for licensure of engineers by examination, I elected to pursue the more stringent and rigorous SE exam. As I do effectively only structural engineering in my current work, and would identify myself as a structural engineer by profession, it seems that the SE exam should be more than adequate to convey my professional skills in regard to becoming licensed in the state of New Jersey.

The action to reject the SE exam by the New Jersey board has resulted in effectively preventing the company I work for from providing engineered precast concrete products in the state of New Jersey and additionally hurts the engineering profession as a whole. By every measure I can find the SE exam is a more rigorous exam than the PE exam. Its only shortcoming is that it focuses exclusively on structural engineering unlike the PE exam; which only partially focuses on an engineering discipline. However this should not be cause for rejection of the SE exam and my (and many others) application for licensure by comity as I do not actively practice in any field other than structural engineering and ethically and legally cannot practice engineering in fields with which I have limited personal experience.

While I fully support the New Jersey Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors in choosing the laws by which they license engineers and surveyors, it is counter-intuitive to accept one exam as basis for licensure and reject a more stringent exam that more accurately reflects my profession as a structural engineer. The requirement that I pass the 8-hour PE exam, which includes some engineering fields with which I have little experience and thus could not ethically practice in, is specifically a requirement of studying and passing an exam solely to prove I can pass the said exam. It will not advance my professional engineering abilities nor will it prove that I am any more competent of a structural engineer. It will only prove that I know how to pass a specific exam partially unrelated to my professional discipline.

With the above in mind I sincerely request the New Jersey board reconsider their position on this matter and begin the process of changing their laws to allow for engineers to be licensed by comity through other engineering exams more stringent than the 8-hour PE exam; such as the 16-hour NCEES structural engineering (SE) exam.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Ian Riley, PE, SE
Professional & Structural Engineer
(Maine, New Hampshire)

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Excellent letter, professionally stated. Not sure how anyone could disagree with that logic presented.

If you ever get a chance to get in a discussion with a specific person on the Board, Karl W. Reidel is their Executive Director who wrote me the letter explaining their position.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

I modified the letter slightly (see my edit above) and directed it specifically to Karl Reidel.

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

The NJ Legislature makes the laws. There may be some benefit to send these letters to the local senators and representatives. And possibly President Governor Christie. It may have limited reach since you are not their constituents, but it might be worth a try.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
TehMightyEngineer,

Just curious if you ever got a response to your letter?

I'm filling out a new application to NJ - this time to take a whole new P.E. exam and not apply through comity. Ugh.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Nope, never heard back. Not sure if I should try to send it to any senators or representatives or not. I'm just going to chock up NJ as a lost cause and hope I never have to do any engineering in that state.

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH, MA)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Quote:

Just curious if you ever got a response to your letter?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, that was a good one! Tears in my eyes, dying here.....

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Well, I might be naive but I at least expected a generic letter in response, something beginning with "thank you for your letter"...

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH, MA)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

So not only do you expect embedded bureaucrats to step up and use commonsense, but now you expect them to be thankful for you making their job more difficult?

Here's a fun game. Fill in the blank - "Government is better than the free market at _____ ." There are actually a couple of positive answers. Commonsense is not one of them.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
Yeah I suppose they are a lost cause, at least until everyone on their current Board dies and gets replaced by a new generation. I'm making another plea within my application to tell them how nonsensical this whole thing is and counterproductive it is to the logic of examination in your area of expertise. Not that it will do any good. But I can't help but to try to make the point to as many sets of eyes as possible within their Board and hopefully it might gain some steam with some members.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

MightyEngineer,

We're ALL naive...until we get slapped in the face by something like this.

If things stay the way they are at some point they'll have to change. Remember, now the only way to take the engineering licensing exam in the structural discipline in the US is by way of the 16 hour SE exam so at some point there will have to be a provision for NJ njineers to get licensed without learning a new discipline. It may take ten years, though.

Hmm...or am I being naive?

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

(OP)
I'd say a 10 year prediction is probably naive...

I think it was 2011 when the Structural I and II exams were dropped and the S.E. exam was introduced, and that change was first announced about 2 years prior to that to allow states to start to make provisions for the change. The concept isn't new anymore, and anyone on a state board of engineers should be well versed in the ongoings of the engineering community with talk of the S.E. exam and specialized S.E. licensure by now.

So it's been 5 years already, no change, and you think something will drastically change in the next 5 years? If I had any confidence in that, I would not be signing up to take another exam for this fall.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

Wow, so you're going through with it? Good on you.

RE: P.E. licensure in New Jersey

All I can say is NJ is loosing out on my licensure fee. I guess I'll just avoid the state as much as I try to avoid their turnpike.

Professional and Structural Engineer (ME, NH, MA)
American Concrete Industries
www.americanconcrete.com

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources